Hello Lubomir,
Am 01.06.2013 18:44, schrieb Lubomir Popov:
New i2c_read, i2c_write and i2c_probe functions, tested on OMAP4 (4430/60/70), OMAP5 (5430) and AM335X (3359); should work on older OMAPs and derivatives as well. The only anticipated exception would be the OMAP2420, which shall require driver modification.
- Rewritten i2c_read to operate correctly with all types of chips (old function could not read consistent data from some I2C slaves).
- Optimised i2c_write.
- New i2c_probe, performs write access vs read. The old probe could hang the system under certain conditions (e.g. unconfigured pads).
- The read/write/probe functions try to identify unconfigured bus.
- Status functions now read irqstatus_raw as per TRM guidelines (except for OMAP243X and OMAP34XX).
- Driver now supports up to I2C5 (OMAP5).
Signed-off-by: Lubomir Popov lpopov@mm-sol.com
V5 changes:
- Replaced some printf() with puts().
- Minor formatting touches, checkpatch-clean.
V4 changes:
- New i2c_probe is built unconditionally, old code is removed. CONFIG_I2C_PROBE_WRITE is no longer needed.
- Added a small delay to work around breakage in AM335X SPL.
- Some whitespace and general formatting cleanup.
V3 changes:
- Removed old functions and conditional compilation. New functions are now built unconditionally for all SoCs using this driver. The only chip that should break is the OMAP2420 dinosaur.
- Interrupts are enabled for OMAP243X and OMAP34XX only (where we don't have an irqstatus_raw register).
V2 changes:
- Probe tries to identify misconfigured pads as well.
- Status is retrieved from irqstatus_raw rather than from stat.
- Some minor style & format changes.
drivers/i2c/omap24xx_i2c.c | 490 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------ 1 file changed, 299 insertions(+), 191 deletions(-)
Tested on 3 arm335x based boards, which one uses i2c in SPL code for getting ram parameters, so:
Tested-by: Heiko Schocher hs@denx.de
Just one comment: Your patch has 9 checkpatch warnings which are all lines (printf strings) over 80 chars ... some with lines > 110 characters ... I know, tom gave you a OK for this ... I am also unhappy with splitting a printf-string over 2 or more lines ... but we have this 80 characters rule ... Wolfgang, what do you think? Should we loosen this rule for printf-strings?
bye, Heiko